Demographic Trends in Incarceration

¶ … Race, Class and Gender and Correctional Settings

Today, the United States incarcerates more than 25% of low-income young black males, so it is reasonable to suggest that there is an inextricable relationship between race, socioeconomic class and gender and the institutional correctional community. It is also reasonable to suggest that this relationship has a corresponding impact on clients, staff and the administration of correctional institutions. To determine the facts, this paper provides a review of the relevant literature to identify the role of race, class and gender within the institutional correctional community and the impact of these variables on clients, staff, and administration. Finally, an analysis concerning the impact of race, class, and gender on current correctional institutions is followed by a summary of the research and important findings concerning the relationship between race, class and gender within the institutional correctional community in the conclusion.

Review and Discussion

The role of race, class, and gender within the institutional correctional community

There are some reciprocating factors involved in the analysis of the role of race, class and gender within the American institutional correctional community, wherein prisoners have an impact on staff and correctional institutions and vice versa. For example, on the one hand, the institutional correctional community plays an important role in shaping a significant percentage of American society through the manner in which prisoners are incarcerated, and the larger American society following their eventual release (assuming they are eligible). For instance, Vitulli (2010) reports that, "The criminal justice system and prison system play a central role in the production of race, citizenship, gender, and sexuality in the contemporary United States" (p. 53). Because a disproportionate percentage of prisoners in the United States are minority members, especially African-Americans, it is clear that the prison system plays a significant role in the socialization of millions of incarcerated Americans today. As Vitulli points out, "With over two million people in U.S. jails and prisons and over seven million people under U.S. correctional supervision -- well over half of whom are people of color, the criminal justice system is an important site of U.S. social formation" (p. 54).

On the other hand, another major role played by the variables race, class and gender within the institutional correctional community has been to swell the populations of male minority members in general and African-American males in particular. The legacy of racism as a lingering aftereffect of slavery in the United States continues to raise its ugly head as evinced by the nationwide outpouring of outrage over the spate of recent fatal shootings of young black men by law enforcement authorities, despite clear-cut evidence that these officers were acting in self-defense. Indeed, even the perception of foul play by anyone in authority can result in allegations of racism, so American correctional institutions are faced with a fine line in administering minority populations which have swelled in recent years. In this regard, Mauer advises that, "By the early twenty-first century, the number of African-Americans within the criminal justice system had reached unprecedented levels. Nearly half of the inmates in the nation's prisons were African-American, compared to their 13% share of the population" (2006, p. 137).

This incarceration rate meant that one out of every 14 adult African-American males was incarcerated on any given day in the United States at the fin de siecle (Mauer, 2006). For young black men, the prospects were even grimmer. For instance, for the African-American male group aged between 20 and 29 years, nearly 25% was involved in the criminal justice system in some capacity (e.g., imprisoned, in jail, on parole or probation) in 1989 (Mauer, 2006). Just 6 years later, a follow-up study determined that the percentage had grown to nearly 33%, and black males who were born in 2001 had a 32% chance of being incarcerated during their lives at some point versus 17% for Hispanic males and 6% for while males (Mauer, 2006).

This disproportionate percentage of incarcerated African-American males is attributable in part to the higher arrest rates that have historically been experienced by this population. For example, Mauer (2006) points out that during a period when actual drug use was on the decline nationwide, the percentage of young black men arrested for drug-related charges increased from 21% in 1980 to 36% in 1992 prior to declining to 32% in 2000. Despite this modest decline, Grusky (2014) emphasizes that, "By the early 2000s, prison time was a common life event for this group, and today more than two-thirds of African-American male dropouts are expected to serve time in state or federal prison" (p. 438).

It remains unclear whether these higher arrest levels were due to racial profiling or otherwise, but the studies conducted concerning these inordinately high percentages indicated that African-American households did not use drugs any more frequently than any other demographic segment in the United States during these periods of time (Mauer, 2006). According to Parker (2008), the majority of explanations that have been advanced to date to account for the higher incarceration rates for minority members in general and African-Americans in particular have examined the role of the law enforcement community and increased emphasis on violent crime but have not differentiated between race, gender and class (Parker, 2008). In this regard, Parker points out that, "Most explanations to date are given without consideration of race and gender differences in crime trends, when we know that the duration and degree of the crime drop differs greatly for distinct groups" (2008, p. 29). Not surprisingly, these disproportionate demographic trends in incarceration have had a concomitant impact on the clients themselves as well as the staff and administration of institutional correctional facilities, and these issues are discussed further below.

The impact of race, class, and gender on clients, staff, and administration

The disproportionately high incarceration rates for minority groups in general and young African-American males in particular have had an enormous impact on their relationship to the larger American society as well as the institutional corrections facilities that are tasked with their custody. Indeed, Grusky (2014) emphasizes that, "These demographic contours of mass imprisonment have created a new class of social outsiders whose relationship to the state and society is wholly different from the rest of the population" (p. 438). Because they are social outsiders within the larger population, it is little wonder that many minority members seek out protection through gang membership after they are incarcerated. As Grusky points out, "The social and economic effects of incarceration create a discrete social group whose collective experience is so distinctive yet unknown that their disadvantage remains largely beyond the apprehension of public policy or public conversation" (2014, p. 438).

Likewise, Horton (2013) cites the increasing compartmentalization of races in prisons into gangs as being an impact of race and gender. For example, Williams (2014) notes that, "Anyone who watches 'Lockdown' on television will see gross racial segregation in prisons where prisoners are housed by race. Colored signs have hung above living quarters -- for example, blue for black inmates, white for white, red, green or pink for Hispanic, and yellow for others. Sometimes inmate yard times are racially segregated" (p. 37). In fact, it would appear that maintaining racial segregation in the nation's prisons is a pragmatic response to an otherwise untenable situation, but the implications of these racial policies on the inmates themselves can be much more severe than prison authorities might believe (Williams, 2014). In this regard, Horton reports that there is a "relationship between violence, norms, and culture as former inmates perceive it and issues of racial segregation, gangs, prison sex and rape, and interpersonal conflict among inmates more generally" (p. 109). Although gang membership and gang-related violence are frequently associated strictly with male prisoners, Horton (2013) also emphasizes that men and women alike can become serious management problems for prison staff. For example, Horton adds that, "Both male and female inmates as active agents who try to control their environment by curbing the disruptive behavior of others, sometimes with the use of violence" (2013, p. 108).

In fact, for all intents and purposes, prison life is as close to living on another and very hostile planet as possible for both men and women of any race or class in American society today. Not only are many minority group members and women from disadvantaged backgrounds and impoverished living conditions, this marginalization is further exacerbated when they are incarcerated. For instance, Grusky reports that, "Social marginality is deepened by the inequalities produced by incarceration. Workers with prison records experience significant declines in earnings and employment" (2014, p. 438). Likewise, imprisoned parents of both genders are at much higher risk of getting a divorce, and children of imprisoned parents are exposed to the rigors of prison life during visits or through witnessing the ordeals a parent goes through on parole or probation (Grusky, 2014). The overwhelming majority of Americans, though, are simply unaware of what the conditions are like in a typical prison and these issues remain largely hidden behind prison walls (Grusky, 2014).

The impact of these large percentages of minority group members behind bars is multifaceted, but some of the more pronounced effects on clients are to inculcate a sense of isolation in a strange and frightening environment and the need to establish camaraderie with people like themselves in ways that contribute to gang proliferation. For instance, Gavazzi (2006) notes that, "The enormous rise in the rates of imprisonment in the adult population has generated an increased appreciation of the criminal justice system's impact on the family, especially regarding the deleterious effects of incarceration on family stability and the ability to parent" (p. 191). In addition, the impact of these large percentages of minority group members on staff and the administration of institutional correctional facilities is also multifaceted and include placing higher demands on available staff to manage gang-related violence and drug trafficking (National Gang Threat Assessment 2011: Emerging trends, 2011).

Prisoners that have gender-related identity issues represent a special concern for prison staff. Individuals who may be undergoing a sex-change procedure who find themselves incarcerated may be at particular risk of having their medical needs go unfulfilled. In this regard, Vitulli (2010) reports that, "The diagnosis of gender identity disorder is difficult and takes time, because it requires differentiating between individuals who are homosexual or transvestite, and those who are truly suffering from gender identity disorder" (p. 55). Another gender-related issue for prison staff is the fact that people can and do change their minds about a change in sex, causing further administrative and health care issues, or they can experience depressive episodes that can result in suicide ideation and attempts (Vitulli, 2010).

The impact of race, class, and gender on current correctional institutions

The impact of race, class and gender on current correctional institutions has been far-reaching, especially at the federal level. For example, federal prisoner classifications depend on the correctional staff's assessment of offenders as well as the types of crimes they have committed. Depending on their classification, male prisoners are assigned to one of three security levels of prisons as follows:

1. Minimum security prisons. These correctional institutions consist of non-secure dormitories that are routinely patrolled by correctional officers. Prisoners are housed in dormitories that are equipped with group toilet and shower facilities adjacent to the sleeping quarters that contain double bunks and lockers. The prison generally has a single perimeter fence that is routinely inspected; however, these facilities do not have armed watch towers or roving patrols. In addition, there is less supervision and control over inmates in the dormitories and less supervision of inmate movement within the prison than at a medium facility. Inmates assigned to minimum security prisons generally pose the least risk to public safety.

2. Medium security prisons. These facilities usually consist of secure dormitories that provide housing for up to 50 inmates each. Like their minimum security counterparts, each dormitory features a group toilet and shower area as well as sinks. Inmates sleep in a military style double bunk and have an adjacent metal locker for storage of uniforms, undergarments, shoes, etc. Each dormitory is locked at night with a correctional officer providing direct supervision of the inmates and sleeping area. The prison usually has a double fence perimeter with armed watch towers or armed roving patrols. There is less supervision and control over the internal movement of inmates than in a close security prison.

3. Maximum security prisons. These facilities consist of cells with sliding cell doors that are remotely operated from a secure control station. These units are used for the confinement of the most dangerous inmates who represent a severe threat to public safety, correctional staff, and other inmates. Inmates confined in a maximum security unit typically are in their cell 23 hours a day. During the other hour they may be allowed to shower and exercise in the cellblock or an exterior cage. All inmate movement is strictly controlled with the use of physical restraints and correctional officer escort (Assigning inmates to prison, 2014).

By contrast, most female prisons have a far different incarceration experience compared to their minimum- and maximum-security male counterparts. For example, in 1993, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons designed and implemented a revised approach for classifying female offenders that considers the fact that these prisoners are generally less violent than their male counterparts and represent a lesser escape risk (Female offenders, 2014). Based on the revised classification system for female inmates, most female offenders are assigned to minimum security correctional facilities (Female offenders, 2014). In addition, the Bureau of Prisons has implemented specialized services and programs for the unique social, physical and psychological needs of female prisoners, with some facilities also offering the full range of educational and recreational programs as their male counterparts (Female offenders, 2014). Furthermore, female offenders receive job training through services for 40 different occupations that are accredited by national accrediting organizations that provide female offenders with new career options following their release (Female offenders, 2014).

These types of gender-specific prison programs have become necessary because females represent the fastest-growing group of prison populations in the world (Pate, 2009). Moreover, Pate argues that this increase in female prisoners has not been an accident, but is rather the result of the criminalization of lower socioeconomic classes that have disproportionately affected women in the United States. In this regard, Pate characterizes the recent increase in lower-income and female prisoners as being the result of a "push to criminalize the most dispossessed as the present manifestation of race, ability, class and gender bias" (2009, p. 21). Indeed, Pate and like-minded prison reformists maintain that "society is at fault" for the inordinately high rates of incarceration of lower socioeconomic individuals in general and women in particular. For example, Pate reports that, "By creating extremely low welfare rates, the government has ensured that many poor people are relegated to the criminalized underclass. In their efforts to survive, poor people are resorting to welfare fraud, prostitution, drug trafficking, or whatever survival strategies they need to provide food for themselves and their families" (2009, p. 22).